Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

FINANCIAL REMEDIES: McRoberts v McRoberts [2012] EWHC 2966 (Ch)

Sep 29, 2018, 18:31 PM
Slug : financial-remedies-mcroberts-v-mcroberts-2012-ewhc-2966-ch
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 5, 2012, 05:50 AM
Article ID : 100807

(Chancery Division, Hildyard J, 1 November 2012)

A consent order was made in 2003 in relation to financial claims following divorce. The order provided for the husband to transfer the matrimonial home and all shares in a specified company to the wife and to pay her a lump sum of £450,000 in a number of instalments. The husband failed to keep up the instalments and he was declared bankrupt.

There was a large deficiency in the bankruptcy and no distributions could be made to unsecured creditors. The wife received nothing and now was owed £350,000 including interest. A year after being declared bankrupt the husband was discharged from bankruptcy. The husband applied to discharge the lump sum order. Section 281(5) of the Insolvency Act 1986 included orders made in financial proceedings as an exclusion from the bankrupt's discharge of debt although they may be discharged at the court's discretion.

In all the circumstances of the case the balance remained in favour of keeping in place the obligation to the wife, there was no sufficient reason to override the default provision. The husband's application was dismissed.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from